Re: Releasability of the kFreeBSD ports
On Sun, 22 Aug 2010, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 22:41 +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > > > So, what do you think is still missing? What would we need to communicate
> > > > as a disclaimer to the users if releasing kFreeBSD in this state?
> [...]
> > With my DSA hat on I have to say that I'm not entirely happy with what
> > we have so far.
> >
> > The biggest pain for us currently is that puppet just does not work
> > reliably on kfreebsd (both i386 and amd64). This may be a ruby bug, but
> > it's still really, really annoying.
>
> Do DSA have any other major concerns about maintaining kfreebsd-*
> machines? (You said puppet is the biggest, so I assume there are others
> of some size)
Not really anything serious, as far as I can remember right now.
There's the odd package that doesn't work for now (e.g. molly-guard),
and some of the packages that we have on all our linux machines don't
exist on kfreebsd but these seem to fall into two categegories:
- linux specific (networking) tools (like vlan, ifenslave,
bridge-utils, iproute, strace, lsof, lshw) which may or may not have
an equivalent tool in kfreebsd, and
- packages that got renamed or removed since lenny (timeout, emacs22).
(The freebsd machines are currently our only squeeze machines,
everything else is on stable.)
There are also a handful of scripts that we have not yet ported to
support kfreebsd properly. For instance our kernel nagios check does
not know enough about freebsd to tell whether it's running the latest
(installed) kernel -
http://git.debian.org/?p=mirror/dsa-nagios.git;a=blob;f=dsa-nagios-checks/checks/dsa-check-running-kernel
if anybody wants to send a patch (or re-implement entirely).
But these other things are not really show-stoppers in my opinion.
Cheers
--
| .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: